This is not a list of vows, this is a list of the 14 root downfalls. It is a root downfall "to have compassion for evil beings especially those who harm the doctrine." Meaning, a tantric yogi should not behave lovingly towards these beings.

Malevolent people are those who despise our personal teachers, spiritual masters in general, or the Buddhas, Dharma, or the Sangha, or who, in addition, cause harm or damage to any of them. Although it is inappropriate to forsake the wish for such persons to be happy and have the causes for happiness, we commit a root downfall by acting or speaking lovingly toward them. Such action includes being friendly with them, supporting them by buying goods they produce, books that they write, and so on. If we are motivated purely by love and compassion, and possess the means to stop their destructive behavior and transfer them to a more positive state, we would certainly try to do so, even if it means resorting to forceful methods. If we lack these qualifications, however, we incur no fault in simply boycotting such persons.

I read it as a prohibition against befriending or becoming personally involved with that kind of person, hence giving our personal loyalty to someone/thing that is in conflict with the Dharma. But I'm not a translator or scholar or anything, so that's just my opinion.

Unless I am quoting scripture or a recognized authority my posts are my opinions only and not Dharma. I offer my posts for entertainment purposes. Hope you find them either interesting or enjoyable!

In Chod, by making the offerings to those beings, aren't they pacified and stop causing harm? I would think that would be the first resort before wrathful liberation, and therefore not violating the samaya in the least. I think by "have compassion for" means to be an enabler and supporter to them, which is obviously very different from helping them stop their destructive actions. One question, though, since I'm not super familiar with chod: are the unenlightened 4th guests being offered to actually beings specifically working against the Dharma or just causing trouble for humans in general?

The 4th class of guests is vast. There are literally dozens and dozens of types of demons in Tibetan lore. I am not aware of any type being excluded. The most straightforward offering in chod is made to all sentient beings, no one is left out. Some sadhanas contain a kind of dharmic gift or seed to get the demon on the right path.

The 4th class is those beings to whom we owe karmic debts by harming and killing them in the past. They are specific to us, in this way, not being general enemies of the Dharma or demonic forces. We pay back our debt by making offerings of all the things we took from them. This isn't just found in chod but also sang and sur offerings and deity sadhanas and even ngondro, where they are given the privileged position closest to the tsok shing.

michaelb wrote:The 4th class is those beings to whom we owe karmic debts by harming and killing them in the past. They are specific to us, in this way, not being general enemies of the Dharma or demonic forces. We pay back our debt by making offerings of all the things we took from them. This isn't just found in chod but also sang and sur offerings and deity sadhanas and even ngondro, where they are given the privileged position closest to the tsok shing.

My understanding (which is admittedly very limited) is that the 4th class is of lower beings. Personal karmic debtors is of course a common and very important group in that class, but it is not the only one. Which guests are invited and how they are fed depends on the type of sadhana and the aim of the practitioner. For instance, when you do chod for others (healing), stop a plague, or pacify a haunted place you're not feeding your personal karmic debtors. The distinction between red and black feasts also relates to this.

If it's true that over infinite lifetimes we're had inconceivable connectionsof every sort with each and every being, then it would follow that weourselves are not on especially good terms with most of them. We've probablymade some promises we've failed to keep. So, although it is bad samayato be close to those who could easily lead us astray, there's still out indebtedness.So, making offerings to them looks like a lenchak offering to pacify. Give themwhat they want so they leave us alone, as it were.